Previous Page Table of Contents Next Page

5.2 Sample Size and Composition

Table 5.1 shows the size and composition of the household survey samples for each country (details are presented in each country report). The samples were stratified according to scale of operation (small-scale, medium-scale, and large-scale or commercial) and type of production arrangement (independent and contract).

The India dairy team randomly sampled a total of 520 households consisting of 200 smallholders, 148 medium-scale farms, 108 large-scale farms, and 60 commercial or peri-urban dairy farms from Gujarat, Punjab, and Haryana. All sample farms operate through cooperatives.

The selection of a sample for the Indian poultry team was quite difficult, as information on the population of poultry farms was limited. The team obtained information from different sources such as the state directory of poultry farms in Haryana and Andhra Pradesh, the integrators' list, and the National Egg Coordination Council (NECC). To capture characteristics of poultry units such as nearness to urban/rural areas and nearness to a main road, the team sampled 159 broiler farms, 110 of which were small-scale and 49 of which were large-scale. Of the 159 samples, 136 were independents and 23 were under contract arrangement with the integrator. There were a total of 160 layer farms sampled, consisting of 63 small-scale and 98 large-scale farms, all of which were operating independently.

For the Philippines, a total of 207 hog farms (110 smallholder farms and 97 large-scale/commercial farms) were surveyed from Central Luzon, Southern Tagalog, and Bukidnon. Of the 110 smallholders, 87 were independents and 23 contracts; and of the 97 large-scale/commercial farms, 67 were independents and 30 contracts. Surveys also covered 116 broiler farms, constituting 62 smallholders and 54 large-scale farms. The sample broiler farms were further disaggregated as independent and contract farms, of which 54 farms were classified as independents and 62 farms as contracts.

The sample composition for four livestock commodities in Brazil is as follows. The broiler survey consisted of 235 farms, of which 6 farmers were producing as independents or not under contract. The sample size of the egg producers (layers) was 89 distributed among states according to the methodology defined by the Brazilian Institute of Geography and Statistics (IBGE). Of the 89 sample farms, 41 were small-scale, 26 medium-scale, and 22 large-scale farms. As for the swine survey, a sample of 193 farms were taken, stratified according to number of parents, following the methodology defined by IBGE. The producers were divided into three groups: integrated under contract by companies (99 samples), integrated as members of cooperatives (37 samples), and independent (57 samples). The sample of dairy farmers included 160 producers, which were taken from selected states representing 76 percent of milk production in Brazil. Small-scale dairy farmers are expressive in Rio Grande do Sul and Santa Catarina, while larger farms dominate in Paraná, São Paulo, Minas Gerais and Goiás.

A total of 92 dairy farm households in Thailand were sampled, of which 35 are smallholders, 38 medium-scale farms, and 19 large-scale farms. The most common production arrangement in dairy is contract farming with a cooperative. For swine producing households, a total of 174 households were surveyed, of which 20 were classified as small-scale farms, 70 medium-low-scale, 42 medium-high-scale farms, and 42 large-scale farms. Of the total sample, 125 farms were independent farms and the rest were contract farms divided into fee or wage-contract farms (30 samples) and forward-price-guaranteed farms (19 samples).

The sample for layer farms in Thailand was composed of 41 smallholders, 32 medium-scale farms, and 23 large-scale farms. Of these 96 farms, 88 were grouped as independents, the rest were subcontracts. The broiler samples totaled 170, of which 74 were small-scale farms, 51 medium-low, 27 medium-high, and 18 large-scale farms. All of the layer farms were under contract (except for one independent and one integrator), either under forward-price contract or per-chick (fee) contract arrangement.

Previous Page Top of Page Next Page